The Origin of Copper

[newmoon]

From KenCroswell.com:<br /><br />Most of the copper in pennies and pipes arose in supergiant stars like Rigel and Betelgeuse, say astronomers in Italy. The stars then exploded, casting the copper into space. The new finding means that gold, silver, and copper all owe their existence to massive stars.

 

[docm]

It's been known for a long time that much of the volume of elements from oxygen up originated in supernovae. They even produce black diamonds.<br /><br />This is why a supernova explosion likely started the formation of our solar system; the large amount of elements in this system that had to be formed in one. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> </div>

 

[MeteorWayne]

In fact everything other than Hydrogen, Helium and Lithium all came from star processing. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p><font color="#000080"><em><font color="#000000">But the Krell forgot one thing John. Monsters. Monsters from the Id.</font></em> </font></p><p><font color="#000080">I really, really, really, really miss the "first unread post" function</font><font color="#000080"> </font></p> </div>

 

[newmoon]

"It's been known for a long time that much of the volume of elements from oxygen up originated in supernovae."<br /><br />No, there are many heavy elements that were NOT made in supernovae. For example, oxygen, neon, and magnesium arose mostly in massive stars before the stars died; then the supernovae that ended the stars' lives cast the elements into space.<br /><br />Also, strontium, yttrium, barium, and several other elements heavier than iron arose in less massive stars--which did not explode--through the s-process.<br /><br />As the article states, the origin of copper has been controversial. In contrast, it has long been known that gold and silver arose in supernovae.<br />

 

[newmoon]

"In fact everything other than Hydrogen, Helium and Lithium all came from star processing."<br /><br />There are two exceptions to this statement: beryllium and boron, which arose via spallation.

 

[silylene old]

<font color="yellow">"In fact everything other than Hydrogen, Helium and Lithium all came from star processing." <br /><br />There are two exceptions to this statement: beryllium and boron, which arose via spallation. </font><br /><br />Many other exceptions to this are certain daughter isotopes subsequently formed by decaying of the primary unstable isotope (which were formed within a star which went nova or supernova), long after the supernova was vor and gone. For example, supernovas spread Al-26 isotope widely into space....over the next few hundred thousand years, this decayed to form Mg-26. Mn-53 formed within and spread by supernovas gradually decayed to form the supply of Cr-53. Etc, etc.<br /><br />Spallation, as mentioned above is also an important process which forms elements in interstellar space. From Wikipedia:<br /><blockquote><font class="small">In reply to:</font><hr /><p>When the heavy nuclei components of primary cosmic rays, namely the carbon and oxygen nuclei, collide with interstellar matter, they break up into lighter nuclei (in a process termed cosmic ray spallation), into lithium, beryllium and boron. It is found that the energy spectra of Li, Be and B falls off somewhat steeper than that of carbon or oxygen, indicating that less cosmic ray spallation occurs for the higher energy nuclei presumably due to their escape from the galactic magnetic field. <font color="yellow">Spallation is also responsible for the abundances of Sc, Ti, V and Mn elements</font>in cosmic rays, which are produced by collisions of Fe and Ni nuclei with interstellar matter...<p><hr /></p></p></blockquote><br /><br />Finally, I want to point out yet another mechanism for forming unique isotopes: Cosmic rays interact with Earth's atmosphere to create C-14 from N-14 according to this pathway:<br />p + O-16 - /> n + pi<br />n + N-14 - /> p + C-14<br />This process forms about 70 tons of C-14 every year in the Earth's atmosphere. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature" align="center"><em><font color="#0000ff">- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -</font></em> </div><div class="Discussion_UserSignature" align="center"><font color="#0000ff"><em>I really, really, really miss the "first unread post" function.</em></font> </div> </div>

 

[newmoon]

I think MeteorWayne was referring to the bulk of each element, rather than individual isotopes. Certainly that's what I meant--and it's certainly true that the bulk of each element from carbon (atomic number 6) to uranium (atomic number 92) arose by stellar processing.<br /><br />Of course, those of us interested in the origin of the elements are also interested in exactly which stars produced which elements--and how. That's why the new work on copper is intriguing.

 

[MeteorWayne]

No actually I was referring to anything other than Hydrogen, Helium, and a pinch of Lithium.<br /><br />Even spallation, and cosmic rays, and AL-26 decay....all are ultimately derived from stellar processes that occurred <font color="orange"> after </font>the original matter "creation" (or more correctly, conversion) from the big bang. AFAIK, there is no cosmic ray creation process that operates before the first supermassive H,He,Li stars formed, and expelled that huge amount of energy.<br /><br />I could be wrong, but that's how I understand it. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p><font color="#000080"><em><font color="#000000">But the Krell forgot one thing John. Monsters. Monsters from the Id.</font></em> </font></p><p><font color="#000080">I really, really, really, really miss the "first unread post" function</font><font color="#000080"> </font></p> </div>

 

[silylene old]

MW, you are correct. I was simply pointing out that some individual elemental isotopes were formed by processes not within a star...and of course, as you point out, from heavy progentator atoms originally formed within stars. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature" align="center"><em><font color="#0000ff">- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -</font></em> </div><div class="Discussion_UserSignature" align="center"><font color="#0000ff"><em>I really, really, really miss the "first unread post" function.</em></font> </div> </div>

 

[MeteorWayne]

We're more or less on the same page here <img src="/images/icons/smile.gif" /> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p><font color="#000080"><em><font color="#000000">But the Krell forgot one thing John. Monsters. Monsters from the Id.</font></em> </font></p><p><font color="#000080">I really, really, really, really miss the "first unread post" function</font><font color="#000080"> </font></p> </div>

 

[robnissen]

Interesting thread. I learned a lot of things I didn't know from this thread. One question remains, however: Does anyone know why Helium was created after the big bang? It is my understanding that the heavier elements were created in stars, because the temperatures and pressures are only high enough inside stars to force protons together to form the heavier elements. Why is that also not true for the two protons that form helium?

 

[newmoon]

"Does anyone know why Helium was created after the big bang? It is my understanding that the heavier elements were created in stars, because the temperatures and pressures are only high enough inside stars to force protons together to form the heavier elements. Why is that also not true for the two protons that form helium?"<br /><br />Helium-4 is the stablest light nuclide. Contrary to popular belief, the universe shortly after the big bang was quite undense. A mere four seconds after the big bang, the universe's density had already dropped beneath that of the Earth's atmosphere, and as the universe kept expanding, the density kept falling. As a result, the ONLY nuclear reactions that could occur right after the big bang involved just two particles. Fortunately, it's possible to form helium-4 through a sequence of two-body nuclear reactions, so this element could arise during the first few minutes of the universe's life.<br /><br />The first reaction was simply a proton meeting a neutron to make deuterium, or hydrogen-2. Then the hydrogen-2 met a neutron, proton, or another hydrogen-2 to make hydrogen-3 or helium-3. Further two-body reactions soon led to lots of helium-4.<br /><br />Things couldn't progress much beyond helium-4, however, because there are no stable isotopes with mass numbers 5 or 8. Leaping over that barrier required a THREE-body collision: three helium-4 nuclei joining together to make carbon-12. But such a reaction couldn't happen shortly after the big bang, because the universe was too undense then. Instead, this nuclear reaction had to wait until a denser environment emerged--namely, stars. That's why stars are responsible for all elements from carbon to uranium.<br /><br />The detailed nuclear reactions that occurred right after the big bang are on pages 106-107 of Ken Croswell's book The Universe at Midnight, which should be available at any good public library.

 

[robnissen]

Thx. I appreciate the response.

 

[Boris_Badenov]

<font color="yellow"> Then I have a question - what about lead. Is it true that most radioactive elements or uranium itself when decays far enough...become lead.? </font><br /><br /> I did a little digging for you.<br /><br /> THE ORIGIN OF THE ELEMENTS AND THE LIFE OF A STAR<br /><br />For example, half of an initial number of uranium nuclei having atomic mass 235, the uranium isotope that was used to make the atomic bomb and nuclear reactors, will decay to the element lead in 0.7 billion years, its half-life. After so much history, that uranium isotope is today 140 times less numerous in nature than the more common isotope of uranium having mass 238. When the Earth and planets and Sun were born 4.5 billion years ago, the 235 isotope was only three times less abundant than the 238 isotope. But every 0.7 billion years half of it transmuted to lead, so that after the 4.5 billion year age of the Earth, their number had decreased to only 1/140th of the 238 uranium. In such ways one knows the age of the Earth.<br /><br /><br /><br /> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <font color="#993300"><span class="body"><font size="2" color="#3366ff"><div align="center">. </div><div align="center">Never roll in the mud with a pig. You'll both get dirty & the pig likes it.</div></font></span></font> </div>

 

[newmoon]

Most lead on Earth does NOT come from the radioactive decay of uranium.<br /><br />Instead, most lead arose in red giants, where a slow flux of neutrons built lead (atomic number 82) from iron nuclei. The s-process is responsible for about 80 percent of terrestrial lead.<br /><br />The remaining 20 percent arose during the r-process, when massive stars exploded.<br /><br />For bismuth (atomic number 83), things are the opposite. The r-process made about 65 percent of terrestrial bismuth, while the s-process made about 35 percent.<br /><br />In the case of copper, which was the starting point of this thread, the new work suggests it arose mostly in the s-process, but in supergiants rather than mere giants.